Regulations protect the unsuspecting from the unscrupulous

Friday

Apr 29, 2011 at 12:01 AM

Kathy Silverberg

How much government regulation is too much? How much freedom are Americans willing to give up to be protected from the dangers of charlatans or cheats?

Those are fundamental questions that this nation and its lawmakers have struggled with over the years. Extremes on both sides can have far-ranging implications. When the climate gets too restrictive, business investment can be stymied; when it is too lax, people's health and well-being can be at serious risk.

The Florida Legislature is considering a series of measures that would greatly reduce government regulation of various professions and businesses.

The pro-business climate currently sweeping through Tallahassee has brought out those who view almost any restriction as anti-jobs and seem to believe the philosophy, "Let the buyer beware," should be the guiding principle of a free marketplace.

There is reason for concern that overly zealous government regulations can discourage those seeking to start or expand businesses. It often takes too long and requires too much paperwork for entrepreneurs who wish to enter the marketplace. Too many become discouraged and choose another path. The jobs that might have been created are lost and the potential economic benefits for the community become a missed opportunity.

Yet who among us would not want someone with unscrupulous intentions to be discouraged from a business venture? Why should someone who is planning to con people out of their life savings or, worse, to threaten their health be allowed to start a business unfettered by government regulations?

House bill goes too far

An article in the Herald-Tribune Sunday told the sad story of a 77-year-old woman, still mourning the death of her husband, who unwittingly spent $300,000 on dance lessons. Regulation of such businesses would end under a bill approved by the Florida House of Representatives. Now that the House and Senate appear poised to adopt a budget, and since the Senate has not proposed or debated a similar measure, this proposal seems unlikely to go forward this year, and that is a good thing. It simply would go too far.

Some might say that the victim of the dance studio scam, which included an expensive lifetime membership couched in a complicated contract, should have known better. True. But everyone has been in a vulnerable position at one time or another and would hope someone, particularly their government, was looking out for them. Think about what happens after a hurricane or similar disaster. People are desperate to get help as they struggle to put their lives back together. It is a perfect climate for unscrupulous scammers to do their damage.

Among the businesses on the Florida House list for deregulation are movers and interior decorators. It would be way too easy to take money from clients under questionable circumstances and then fail to deliver. It happened countless times in Charlotte County after Hurricane Charley struck, and many of the victims were the elderly.

Also considered for deregulation are charitable organizations, another area ripe for separating people from their money. Although most nonprofit groups are diligently using donations to accomplish the purposes that stir the passions of their supporters, some have motives that are less than humanitarian.

Reputations to protect

There are ways to check out the legitimacy of a charity, such as IRS records that are available on line, but some people -- particularly the elderly -- are so trusting that they give money to people who sound sincere but are unable or unwilling to deliver on their promises. Those people damage the ability of all charities to raise money as the public becomes skeptical of the entire sector.

Other businesses such as auto mechanics, gyms and travel brokers are included in the deregulation bill. Here again, seniors can be easy targets. In a state with a large older population -- nearly 18 percent of it 65 and older, compared with the national level of 13 percent -- the need for consumer protection would seem to be more important than ever.

It was encouraging to see that many of those in the categories considered for a lessening of oversight are speaking out in opposition. They are not interested in being associated with those who would tarnish the reputation of hard-working professionals.

Unnecessary government intrusion into individual business dealings is a detriment to the simplicity of the free market system. Those who work hard, give customers a good deal for their money and make smart decisions for the future should be allowed to prosper without undue regulations. Most of the time these are the people who succeed. But sometimes, the wily ways of those interested in making a fast buck hurt people who can least afford it. Those are the people who make regulations a necessity.

Kathy Silverberg is the former publisher of the Herald-Tribune's southern editions. Email: kathy.silverberg@comcast.net

Never miss a story

Choose the plan that's right for you.
Digital access or digital and print delivery.